Would Libertarians have supported the North or South during the Civil War?

[Dazey]

Libertarians would definitely have favored the Confederacy IMO.

[sparkey]

Lysander Spooner's thought on the Civil War is popular among many libertarians even today. He's a pretty good approximation of what you would get if you plopped a hardcore modern libertarian into the Civil War period. He was a staunch abolitionist who wanted all the slaves freed immediately, but thought that the Confederacy was legal and that the Civil War was illegal. I'm not sure that he fits on either side of the war. So, to answer the question: No.

Auberon Herbert was also contemporary to the Civil War. He said: "I am very glad that slavery is done away with, but I think the manner is very bad and wrong."

[Türkisblau]

Lysander Spooner's thought on the Civil War is popular among many libertarians even today. He's a pretty good approximation of what you would get if you plopped a hardcore modern libertarian into the Civil War period. He was a staunch abolitionist who wanted all the slaves freed immediately, but thought that the Confederacy was legal and that the Civil War was illegal. I'm not sure that he fits on either side of the war. So, to answer the question: No.

Auberon Herbert was also contemporary to the Civil War. He said: "I am very glad that slavery is done away with, but I think the manner is very bad and wrong."

How is this not clear? If you think that the Confederacy was legal and thought the Civil War (action of North against the South as many Libertarians/Dixie lovers believe) was "illegal" then you supported the South in the Civil War as well as it's institutional slavery. That's not a confusing concept.

The best argument against modern day "libertarians" is how they would have reacted in historical situations, with the Civil War and Civil Rights being major demonstrations of the shortcomings of the ideology.

[H. Ross Peron]

Depends on the type of Libertarian.

Hardline anarcho-capitalists (ie Murray Rothbard) and paleolibertarians (like Ron Paul) of course would rally to the Stars and Bars in a heartbeat.

On the other hand, a lot of moderate libertarians (ie those who are really closer to European liberals then strict libertarianism) as well as Objectivists would incline to the Union.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Neither, marijuana wasn't banned yet so they wouldn't even need to become libertarian in the first place.

[bedstuy]

Libetarianism is generally about maximizing the freedom of white men at the expense of everyone else, so the South.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Libetarianism is generally about maximizing the freedom of white men at the expense of everyone else, so the South.

LOL, you're quickly rising up the Democratic hack rankings, dude.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The North, as legalized slavery would not be something a true libertarian could ever support. That being said, they'd probably support McClellan in 1864 against Lincoln.

[Türkisblau]

The North, as legalized slavery would not be something a true libertarian could ever support. That being said, they'd probably support McClellan in 1864 against Lincoln.

lincoln nationalized teh railroads

[dead0man]

Depends on the type of Libertarian.

Silly you, there is only one kind of libertarian and it's whatever the person bad mouthing them says it is.

[Türkisblau]

Lysander Spooner's thought on the Civil War is popular among many libertarians even today. He's a pretty good approximation of what you would get if you plopped a hardcore modern libertarian into the Civil War period. He was a staunch abolitionist who wanted all the slaves freed immediately, but thought that the Confederacy was legal and that the Civil War was illegal. I'm not sure that he fits on either side of the war. So, to answer the question: No.

Auberon Herbert was also contemporary to the Civil War. He said: "I am very glad that slavery is done away with, but I think the manner is very bad and wrong."

How is this not clear? If you think that the Confederacy was legal and thought the Civil War (action of North against the South as many Libertarians/Dixie lovers believe) was "illegal" then you supported the South in the Civil War as well as it's institutional slavery. That's not a confusing concept.

Surely you aren't arguing Lysander Spooner was pro slavery..

Maybe he opposed it ideologically but at the same time his ideology would have allowed for the institution to persist. So yes, he was obviously pro-slavery in a way.

This is the kind of thing that "libertarianism" allows for in practice and is why so many liberals/populists/conservatives have such strong reactions towards it. It is morally bankrupt in the highest regard.

[SWE]

Libetarianism is generally about maximizing the freedom of white men at the expense of everyone else, so the South.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Libertarians would definitely have favored the Confederacy IMO.

Libertarians of course would support the Confederacy. They believe that secession and rebellion is protected by the Constitution.

[Sumner 1868]

Well, there was a collection of anarchists who supported the North. But varies by individual is the best answer.

[Dazey]

Depends on the type of Libertarian.

Silly you, there is only one kind of libertarian and it's whatever the person bad mouthing them says it is.

Libertarians are terrorists.

[TDAS04]

Depends on what's more important to them; states' rights or individual rights?

[Ebsy]

Depends on what's more important to them; states' rights or individual rights?

I refuse to buy into the notion that the concept of state's rights caused the civil war. It was about slavery, not federalism. Otherwise, Jefferson Davis wouldn't have repeatedly trampled over states rights as President of the Confederacy.

[Sumner 1868]

Depends on what's more important to them; states' rights or individual rights?

I refuse to buy into the notion that the concept of state's rights caused the civil war. It was about slavery, not federalism. Otherwise, Jefferson Davis wouldn't have repeatedly trampled over states rights as President of the Confederacy.

Would they care?

[SATW]

Depends on the type of Libertarian.

Hardline anarcho-capitalists (ie Murray Rothbard) and paleolibertarians (like Ron Paul) of course would rally to the Stars and Bars in a heartbeat.

On the other hand, a lot of moderate libertarians (ie those who are really closer to European liberals then strict libertarianism) as well as Objectivists would incline to the Union.

This. I wish I knew more of the latter type of Libertarians.

[RINO Tom]

Depends on what's more important to them; states' rights or individual rights?

I refuse to buy into the notion that the concept of state's rights caused the civil war. It was about slavery, not federalism. Otherwise, Jefferson Davis wouldn't have repeatedly trampled over states rights as President of the Confederacy.

This.  The CSA was SO much more centralized and quite frankly socialist than any other governing body this country has ever seen.

Anyway, it'd obviously depend on where they lived.  I think you all dig into what "type" of person/voter would think this or that during the Civil War.  There were educated/uneducated, rich/poor, urban/rural people all passionately on the same sides out of loyalty to their region.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Which of the draft-enforcing expansionist powers would a libertarian support?  It has to be one or the other?

[Zioneer]

Literally every libertarian I have ever met has argued that the Confederacy wasn't so bad and that the Union was evil/tyrannical (even after I point out that the state's right argument is crap), so I assume they'd support the South. Ron Paul certainly would have.

[Goldwater]

Literally every libertarian I have ever met has argued that the Confederacy wasn't so bad and that the Union was evil/tyrannical (even after I point out that the state's right argument is crap), so I assume they'd support the South. Ron Paul certainly would have.

So, have you not met me, or do I not count as a libertarian?

[RFayette]

Literally every libertarian I have ever met has argued that the Confederacy wasn't so bad and that the Union was evil/tyrannical (even after I point out that the state's right argument is crap), so I assume they'd support the South. Ron Paul certainly would have.

So, have you not met me, or do I not count as a libertarian?

Same with me.  I suppose there's a big difference between a full blown libertarian and your standard social liberal fiscal conservative

[dead0man]

He's already made up in his mind what a libertarian is, a lot of people do.  It doesn't matter what actual libertarians think and believe.